Implications of successful Norse Colonization in North America as well as on Mesoamerican, Oasis-American, and Andean regions and civilizations?

[EmperorOfTheNorthSea]

Whoo thats a whollop of a title.

So basically in recent years and months I've noticed an upsurge in Vinland threads and the like, specifically one that do more than just posit whether the initial colony would fail or not which has pretty much been the staple for discussions about a Norse North America. Please for the sake of staying on track if you want to dismiss this thread or call it a wide stretch of the imaginations do keep in mind we've been hearing that on this board for years now and I think the recent threads have come to the conclusion that it was possible though not necessarily likely but perhaps even probable if certain conditions were met, I honestly think that sums up that whole argument that's been done to death, and also when people talk about being 'tired' of Vinland threads I imagine those derailing arguments are certainly a factor.

What I ask is that in this event a Norse colonization that was moderately successful with a slightly higher birthrate than in Europe along with a small steady stream of disfranchised independent farmers from Greenland and Iceland trickle in with perhaps a bit of making Thralls out of natives (or the half native bastard children made as a result of having said Thralls), lead to a Vinland that by (rough timeslot) 1180 populates most shores of the St. Lawrence Gulf and quite deep into the St. Lawrence valley just about would have happened, with maybe a peppering of small settlements on the northern part of the American east coast situated mostly on Islands and such. I think this is a fairly logical outcome of a 'better' Vinland that has some criteria met though I admit could be flawed.

What would be the Natural progression of such a state? Going forward would their existence being known on the other side of the Atlantic (I bet some Alt-Adam of Bremen figure would have a pretty significant impact more than otl with more knowledge) lead to earlier (Geographical not Racial) European involvement in the New World? Or would Norse North America being relatively sparse along with a lack of grandiose notions of the Spanish conquests to make European courts and Rulers interested in forking over the massive loads of cash to even fund an expedition when they expect to get nothing more than trees and uncivilized natives? Would the Norse Americans rely on foreign traders or would they have sailors of their own to sail to European markets?

How would their system of government start off as and change as the centuries go by? I admit I had an idea of a 17th century Oliver Cromwell-esque Vinlandic military dictator rapidly centralizing and modernizing the country a while back. How would the plains Natives be different with a concentration of the shaggy northern European Horse breeds in comparison to the breeds brought by the Spanish (I imagine after a handful of years when you have men wealthy enough you could see foreign stallions being shipped in every once in a while but I'd imagine the majority of the Horses' genepool would be from proto-Icelandic or Norwegian breeds.) Would this lead to a greater importance to Nomadic tribes in the Albert and Saskatchewan region of the plains? Would a longer time for the tribes to develop lead to Steppe empires and kingdoms?

How would the history of Meso-America play out? Would the Norse get there before Europeans and do they not attempt a conquest? Do they imitate the Spanish empire in it's conquest on the coastal New world as the Spanish did? In all honesty because of butterflies the Aztec and Inca might not even exist with whatever conqueror having to go through a Myriad of statelets. Would an earlier fur trade in the Hudson bay area lead to an identity of a Pomor-esque Métis in the region? Could the Northwest passage be discovered before the little ice age comes full effect?

Would a conquest of the Andes and the West coast of South America even be feasible without matchlocks, Crossbows, or Arquebusiers? Would a Norse Galleon-like trans-pacific trade with Asia be possible? How much could that change things?

How would disease really play out, that's one that I think a lot of people overlook or make assumptions on, after all they wouldn't be getting the full cocktail until later so I don't know what chance I could see for them to gain immunity from unless there was a significant amount of diseases from which ne could gain an immunity; but even then that would be hard as I imagine the only ones who would come into regular contact with said diseases would be natives engaged in trade with Norse and I don't know how well your average cold inducing virus can get around before herd immunity contains it.

What type of wars would a hypothetical American Norse country get into as the years go by from a geo-political sense? My impression is that they may like the Dutch but depending on how things turn out in Europe or the East Indies that could change, they would probably have positive relations with whoever controls Ireland. I do see them having strained tensions with whatever Iberian power comes about.

I think there's a lot of potential in a Vinland what-if scenario, and while a lot of these will require assumptions (which is why they don't stray too far from the initial founding) I still think it's interesting to ponder "where the ball will roll" as it were.

 

[Gwyain]

I'm fairly conservative when it comes to Vinland scenarios, so take what I say with a certain grain of salt. I don't think anything changes in the Andes, and I'm doubtful too much changes in Mesoamerica (if it does at all). For that matter, I don't think anything really changes for most of Europe either. The thing is, I don't think an empty land on the edge of the European world attracts nearly as much attention in the high middle ages as a lot of people seem to. Communication is limited and to most people in Europe its not going to sound all that more inviting than Iceland and Greenland, and Vinland is of course even further afield. Because of this, I think a Spanish like expansion is extraordinarily unlikely, and I think the same about large scale English style settler colonies. What seems likelier to me is something closer to the French colonization of North America, which seems appropriate too given the same area is being colonized in Vinland scenarios as was done by French North America. The big difference though is that the playing field is a lot more level with Norse colonization than French because the technological disparity isn't nearly as great and because the disease landscape in Scandinavia at the time isn't go to cause nearly the same precipitous drop in population as with the Spaniards.

My suspicion is that settlement will be relatively concentrated at first and slowly spread along the Gulf and River of Saint Lawrence with some assimilation and creolization of native groups along the way (a situation which was seen OTL with the Acadians in the modern Maritimes). I've mellowed some on creolization compared to previous threads, but I do still think a great deal of cultural mixing will occur.

I really don't see Vinland expanding to the extent of the Great Lakes for a while, probably 200 years minimum. It took nearly that long OTL and that was with far more demographic weight from Europe and with diseases running rampant. North America is big, and there's a lot of land to be had long before things start getting really settled around the lakes, much less beyond them down the Mississippi and Red River.

 

[Gloss]

So basically in recent years and months I've noticed an upsurge in Vinland threads and the like, specifically one that do more than just posit whether the initial colony would fail or not which has pretty much been the staple for discussions about a Norse North America. Please for the sake of staying on track if you want to dismiss this thread or call it a wide stretch of the imaginations do keep in mind we've been hearing that on this board for years now and I think the recent threads have come to the conclusion that it was possible though not necessarily likely but perhaps even probable if certain conditions were met, I honestly think that sums up that whole argument that's been done to death, and also when people talk about being 'tired' of Vinland threads I imagine those derailing arguments are certainly a factor.

On that note virtually all threads work with the assumptions that nothing else is changed, but that's not necessarily the case depending on your wishes, we can have some earlier POD that could make the entire endeavor more likely like having certain inventions or practices spread earlier that could allow for things like bigger population sizes in the North Sea, better boats or earlier colonization of places like Iceland.

What I ask is that in this event a Norse colonization that was moderately successful with a slightly higher birthrate than in Europe along with a small steady stream of disfranchised independent farmers from Greenland and Iceland trickle in with perhaps a bit of making Thralls out of natives (or the half native bastard children made as a result of having said Thralls), lead to a Vinland that by (rough timeslot) 1180 populates most shores of the St. Lawrence Gulf and quite deep into the St. Lawrence valley just about would have happened, with maybe a peppering of small settlements on the northern part of the American east coast situated mostly on Islands and such. I think this is a fairly logical outcome of a 'better' Vinland that has some criteria met though I admit could be flawed.

Yes that seems possible with a colonization starting in late 10th century.

What would be the Natural progression of such a state?

I don't think it would be one state, as they expand in all direction multiple kingdoms and independent settlements would be formed, kinda like Iron age Greeks. States could be formed on the basis of islands being filled enough and foreign threat.

Going forward would their existence being known on the other side of the Atlantic (I bet some Alt-Adam of Bremen figure would have a pretty significant impact more than otl with more knowledge) lead to earlier (Geographical not Racial) European involvement in the New World?

Definitely, but it would help if the reconquista happened quicker(or if you had no Muslims at all even, again no need to limit ourselves if the constraints of a 10th century POD are too much)

Or would Norse North America being relatively sparse along with a lack of grandiose notions of the Spanish conquests to make European courts and Rulers interested in forking over the massive loads of cash to even fund an expedition when they expect to get nothing more than trees and uncivilized natives?

The French and English did not gave up the notion of colonizing North America after seeing with their eyes what it is.

Would the Norse Americans rely on foreign traders or would they have sailors of their own to sail to European markets?

Probably both, but at the start they would have to themselves or with the help of Greenlanders and Icelanders.

How would their system of government start off as and change as the centuries go by? I admit I had an idea of a 17th century Oliver Cromwell-esque Vinlandic military dictator rapidly centralizing and modernizing the country a while back.

That's really up in the air, but I don't think it will deviate too far from what's going on in Northern Europe at least in terms of ideology.

Would a longer time for the tribes to develop lead to Steppe empires and kingdoms?

Probably, but it's not like we actually had steppe empires or even kingdoms OTL, it took more than a couple of centuries for the Eurasian nomads to do so even with the presence of large empires, trade routes and advanced native metallrugy as catalyst, I don't see justification for anything more complex than we saw OTL.

How would the history of Meso-America play out? Would the Norse get there before Europeans and do they not attempt a conquest?

I don't think any serious contact would happen within 200-300 years of Norse presence in the Americas. Wether or not Europeans get there before is really depended on the timeline, ship technology and what's going on in Europe.

Do they imitate the Spanish empire in it's conquest on the coastal New world as the Spanish did? In all honesty because of butterflies the Aztec and Inca might not even exist with whatever conqueror having to go through a Myriad of statelets.

They probably won't, not out of the blue, but they will probably be opportunistic and if the political culture they developed so far worked they would continue with that.

Would an earlier fur trade in the Hudson bay area lead to an identity of a Pomor-esque Métis in the region? Could the Northwest passage be discovered before the little ice age comes full effect?

Probably no, Metis as such exist because few women came, insofar as Norse people settle the region with family units and in a rather permanent fashion, by the time they enter inland it would be with families unity as well, mixing wouldn't be of that type.

Would a conquest of the Andes and the West coast of South America even be feasible without matchlocks, Crossbows, or Arquebusiers? Would a Norse Galleon-like trans-pacific trade with Asia be possible? How much could that change things?

With time those things will be developed, especially if the Norse of steady contact with Europe.

How would disease really play out, that's one that I think a lot of people overlook or make assumptions on, after all they wouldn't be getting the full cocktail until later so I don't know what chance I could see for them to gain immunity from unless there was a significant amount of diseases from which ne could gain an immunity; but even then that would be hard as I imagine the only ones who would come into regular contact with said diseases would be natives engaged in trade with Norse and I don't know how well your average cold inducing virus can get around before herd immunity contains it.

They won't get some sort ofcontinental wide Norse vaccination, the Norse will only spread diseases to people they contact directly outside maybe the more interconnected Mississippi culture.

What type of wars would a hypothetical American Norse country get into as the years go by from a geo-political sense? My impression is that they may like the Dutch but depending on how things turn out in Europe or the East Indies that could change, they would probably have positive relations with whoever controls Ireland. I do see them having strained tensions with whatever Iberian power comes about.

With Europeans? I think by the time Europeans are in the position to threaten with oversea warfare the Norse there will have their own political identity and enough local manpower to make it hard, but at the same time Europeans can always have technology like guns that maybe aren't implemented that well. But I think intervention or more subtle ways of fighting are more likely, the Europeans would probably look for other areas not exploited yet.

 

[Anarch King of Dipsodes]

One important implication: maize, potatoes, and tobacco could arrive in the Old World centuries sooner.

 

[Zireael]

One important implication: maize, potatoes, and tobacco could arrive in the Old World centuries sooner.

For a given value of "arrive" - we would *know* of their existence earlier but Scandinavia is waaay too far north to cultivate any of those, except maaaybe potatoes.

Also cassava (aka manioc) and sweet potatoes (other New World foods like chili peppers and pineapple will probably remain curiosities for a long time)

 

[Tirion]

The Vikings were settling and adventuring everywhere they could sail, if they have a base with shipbuilding capabilities in Vinland I don't see them just sitting there. They'll go look for new places and people to meet and trade with, raid or conquer. Depending on risk vs reward.

 

[Swedish luck]

For a given value of "arrive" - we would *know* of their existence earlier but Scandinavia is waaay too far north to cultivate any of those, except maaaybe potatoes.

Also cassava (aka manioc) and sweet potatoes (other New World foods like chili peppers and pineapple will probably remain curiosities for a long time)

I live in Southern Sweden and we grow both maize and potatoes don't know how the climate was then but we could perhaps grow potatoes more ify on the maize.

 

[Jonathan1997]

I am thinking let's say the Nore discover the North America in 9th century than news's spreads to the over kingdoms than we my get princess along with colonists building new independent kingdoms in the new world. We could go all the way back to the Anglo-Saxon invasions of Roman Britain leaving and creating small kingdoms in North America I think there are many ideas that can be developed.

 

[Mad Bad Rabbit]

Will it result in cocaine-snorting Vikings who worship Tezcatlipoca?

 

[9 Fanged Hummingbird]

I live in Southern Sweden and we grow both maize and potatoes don't know how the climate was then but we could perhaps grow potatoes more ify on the maize.

Yeah, it's not like Scandinavia has never had agriculture and potatoes are famously hardy crops. Hell, lots of iconic Scandinavian dishes are made from potatoes AFAIK. That said, I'm also a bit conservative when it comes to ideas about the potential for Vinland to be a huge deal and I'm not sure even potatoes would make it back to the Old World. For sure they'd get to Greenland, but AFAIK Greenland was basically out of contact with Europe.

Will it result in cocaine-snorting Vikings who worship Tezcatlipoca?

No. They ain't getting as far south as Florida let alone Mexico or the Andes, they ain't vikings doing the exploration and settlement of Vinland, and most or at least half the Nordic sailors exploring the area were Christians.

 

[Gwyain]

The Vikings were settling and adventuring everywhere they could sail, if they have a base with shipbuilding capabilities in Vinland I don't see them just sitting there. They'll go look for new places and people to meet and trade with, raid or conquer. Depending on risk vs reward.

They'll go to new places yes, but North America is huge. The distance from Quebec City at the mouth of the Saint Lawrence to New Orleans at the mouth of the Mississippi is ~2800 km (more considering we're likely taking water transport). For perspective, that's roughly the distance from Moscow to Novosibirsk which is nearly halfway across Russia. It's also roughly the distance from Copenhagen to Lisbon, which along with the rest of Iberia didn't see significant Viking activity; lets not forget that this is far closer to the Norse heartland as well. The distance from the Gulf of Saint Lawrence area to Aridoamerica and Mesoamerica is of course even further than New Orleans, and lets not even get started on the Andes. The Norse aren't going to go clear across the continent when they hardly have the numbers there to begin with, and huge swaths of North America are practically empty.

Yeah, it's not like Scandinavia has never had agriculture and potatoes are famously hardy crops. Hell, lots of iconic Scandinavian dishes are made from potatoes AFAIK. That said, I'm also a bit conservative when it comes to ideas about the potential for Vinland to be a huge deal and I'm not sure even potatoes would make it back to the Old World. For sure they'd get to Greenland, but AFAIK Greenland was basically out of contact with Europe.

One important implication: maize, potatoes, and tobacco could arrive in the Old World centuries sooner.

Potatoes aren't making it anywhere, they're restricted to the Andes. Maize too is going to take some time, Northern Flint Corn had only just reached the American Northeast circa 1000. The Norse aren't going to be exposed to it immediately much less begin cultivating it themselves. Getting it back to Europe presents its own problem as well. I don't think we'll be seeing anything on the scale of the Columbian exchange going on for some time.

The big issue I see is that its going to take quite a while for Vinland to become well established and by that point the Little Ice Age starts rearing its head, which makes contact across the Atlantic difficult at best.

 

[garfieldleifrag]

The natives would get horses and exposure to at least some Old World diseases centuries before Europeans show up to most of the continent in force, so they would be much stronger outside of the areas that Vinland takes originally. As for Vinland in the first few centuries, I doubt they would have anywhere near the numbers necessary to take much of the continent besides the parts of Canada by the Atlantic and maybe bits of New England. Honestly, even if Vinland was abandoned just as fast as OTL but enough horses or maybe even cows (source of meat + draft animals + exposure to some diseases so higher population, even without any direct military effects)escape to establish a viable breeding population would have made the natives much stronger than they were OTL.

 

[Gloss]

The natives would get horses and exposure to at least some Old World diseases centuries before Europeans show up to most of the continent in force, so they would be much stronger outside of the areas that Vinland takes originally. As for Vinland in the first few centuries, I doubt they would have anywhere near the numbers necessary to take much of the continent besides the parts of Canada by the Atlantic and maybe bits of New England. Honestly, even if Vinland was abandoned just as fast as OTL but enough horses or maybe even cows (source of meat + draft animals + exposure to some diseases so higher population, even without any direct military effects)escape to establish a viable breeding population would have made the natives much stronger than they were OTL.

No, if that were the case then how did Indo-Europeans conquer all of Europe in something like a millennium? The 2 most popular theories I believe are diseases or horses, if it was so easy fr natives to just adopt everything new then why were so many conquered people in Eurasia not able to survive and not be replaced by various groups that each had frankly a far smaller advantage than the Norse have.

Using this logic hunter-gatherers in Europe would have just adopted farming fron the Anatolians, farmers in India and Europe would have taken horses from Indo-Europeans, Southern Chinese natives would have adopted complex societies the second they were in contact with North Chinese states,.
Outside this strictly theoretical framework the evidence shws that it's not straightforward to adopt new things and even if you did there is still a big gap.

 

[Gloss]

Could wild rice be domesticated by the Norse?

 

[Gwyain]

The natives would get horses and exposure to at least some Old World diseases centuries before Europeans show up to most of the continent in force, so they would be much stronger outside of the areas that Vinland takes originally. As for Vinland in the first few centuries, I doubt they would have anywhere near the numbers necessary to take much of the continent besides the parts of Canada by the Atlantic and maybe bits of New England. Honestly, even if Vinland was abandoned just as fast as OTL but enough horses or maybe even cows (source of meat + draft animals + exposure to some diseases so higher population, even without any direct military effects)escape to establish a viable breeding population would have made the natives much stronger than they were OTL.

Horses in the Americas does not equate to the natives suddenly learning to ride. The horse didn't come into native use until after the Pueblo revolt in 1680, and it took another 50 years after that for the Comanche to make the transition to horse nomadism. Riding isn't actually that intuitive of a concept if you've never been exposed to it, and most Norse horses are going to be draft ponies rather than riding horses. Let's also not forget that their is an important cultural component to domesticated animals. For many American natives the concept of owning a sheep or cow is a foreign, the Navajo are well noted as being unique in their cultivation of sheep. Just because domesticated animals arrive in the Americas does not mean they'll necessarily be taken up.

Could wild rice be domesticated by the Norse?

My (eventual...) Vinland timeline is going to include Wild Rice domestication, so obviously I think its possible. I do however think it would require a calamatous event to force that innovation. For my TL it's going to the arrival of Rinderpest in the 13th century. Necessity is the mother of innovation after all, and the extinction of Cattle in Vinland brought on by Rinderpest and the ensuing famine is what I'm hoping will drive Vinland agriculture towards something new to alleviate the hardship.

 

[EmperorOfTheNorthSea]

Yes that seems possible with a colonization starting in late 10th century.

Is there really that much of a difference between a late 10th century settlement and an early 11th century one? Granted if it has something close to a 2 or 3% annual growth rate that might mean something.

I don't think it would be one state, as they expand in all direction multiple kingdoms and independent settlements would be formed, kinda like Iron age Greeks. States could be formed on the basis of islands being filled enough and foreign threat.

That's possible, though I can't help but think a descendent of Erik (if we don't push the pod too far back, after that all bets are off) would institute a similar system to Greenland with a suzerain paramount chieftain to rally around or a more Icelandic system, maybe a bit of both. Granted I see quite a few settlers telling whatever person to try that to stuff it but I imagine out of common interest or need to uphold treaties and such between larger tribes and any settlements that lack the ability to call on other ones for support have a much likelier chance of getting ransacked. While multiple states are possible I don't see them not merging or one conquering the other after some dispute forms, considering how lightly populated and spread out things would be if one could take an enemies main settlement you could probably get them to capitulate. Generally I think any Icelanders or Greenlanders will want at least some partial Althing so they can address any grievances without needing to resort to a conflict they might not win.

It's an interesting topic that could use some thought.

The French and English did not gave up the notion of colonizing North America after seeing with their eyes what it is.

For the English they did come initially under false pretenses of there being gold but I think it was only the boom in Demand for Tobacco that justified their expenditures. As for the French they got engaged in the Fur trade after numerous expeditions trying to find the Northwest passage. Either way the Massive loads of Riches the Spanish brought back from their conquests as well as from the Peruvian and Mexican mines are what really turned people's heads. While the Norse could trade goodly amounts of furs, Walrus Ivory, and maybe some specialty goods I don't think they'd be seen as much more than just another Novgorod until the fur trade picks up; granted locally I'd imagine the Norse to become quite wealthy in terms of agricultural output but that doesn't mean much over the Atlantic.

I don't think any serious contact would happen within 200-300 years of Norse presence in the Americas. Wether or not Europeans get there before is really depended on the timeline, ship technology and what's going on in Europe.

Yeah thats something I've always been wondering on. the winds and currents along the east coast pushing out to sea might not be good for square rigged vessels to travel along. At the same time they did manage to go from the Loire Estuary to Pisa, Italy in just a few Months. Sailing down the Mississippi Would also put them pretty close.

Probably no, Metis as such exist because few women came, insofar as Norse people settle the region with family units and in a rather permanent fashion, by the time they enter inland it would be with families unity as well, mixing wouldn't be of that type.

True, but I imagine they'd only be in the Hudson bay area for trade and a few stragglers staying behind for trade opportunities or to get away from legal trouble or debt.

Could wild rice be domesticated by the Norse?

Maybe cultivated in a similar manner to the natives did but probably not viewed with enough importance as a staple being a seasonal delicacy of sorts.

 

[Wendell]

How/why is Vinland sustained? Is thee clergy? Literacy? What weapons/equipment/animals are in use and available for (re)production and trade?

 

[Gloss]

Is there really that much of a difference between a late 10th century settlement and an early 11th century one? Granted if it has something close to a 2 or 3% annual growth rate that might mean something.

In my opinion the earlier you start the better, I especially think that a colonization of Newfoundland starting around 900-950 would be the best, just as the climate was warming there I believe.

That's possible, though I can't help but think a descendent of Erik (if we don't push the pod too far back, after that all bets are off) would institute a similar system to Greenland with a suzerain paramount chieftain to rally around or a more Icelandic system, maybe a bit of both. Granted I see quite a few settlers telling whatever person to try that to stuff it but I imagine out of common interest or need to uphold treaties and such between larger tribes and any settlements that lack the ability to call on other ones for support have a much likelier chance of getting ransacked. While multiple states are possible I don't see them not merging or one conquering the other after some dispute forms, considering how lightly populated and spread out things would be if one could take an enemies main settlement you could probably get them to capitulate. Generally I think any Icelanders or Greenlanders will want at least some partial Althing so they can address any grievances without needing to resort to a conflict they might not win.

Well sure, polities on the size of Newfoundland, Novascotia and so on are possible and likely, but a single Vinlander state less so. We aren't talking about dozens of city states like in Archaic Greece, more like the leagues or federations of Hellenistic Greece rather.

For the English they did come initially under false pretenses of there being gold but I think it was only the boom in Demand for Tobacco that justified their expenditures. As for the French they got engaged in the Fur trade after numerous expeditions trying to find the Northwest passage. Either way the Massive loads of Riches the Spanish brought back from their conquests as well as from the Peruvian and Mexican mines are what really turned people's heads. While the Norse could trade goodly amounts of furs, Walrus Ivory, and maybe some specialty goods I don't think they'd be seen as much more than just another Novgorod until the fur trade picks up; granted locally I'd imagine the Norse to become quite wealthy in terms of agricultural output but that doesn't mean much over the Atlantic.

I disagree with that notion, the idea that the French and English blindly went into North America only because of hopes to find gold is not what I see in the evidence, that was only one factor and the ultimate behaviour of various European powers shows that even when North America was shown to be what it really was people still found reasons to send thousands of settlers over despite many problems at home.

Yeah thats something I've always been wondering on. the winds and currents along the east coast pushing out to sea might not be good for square rigged vessels to travel along. At the same time they did manage to go from the Loire Estuary to Pisa, Italy in just a few Months. Sailing down the Mississippi Would also put them pretty close.

Well insofar as they have no reason to seek for long distance trade goods, which they don't at the start because their small populations and weaker oceanic travel capabilities, they won't go to such length so quickly.

 

[Jürgen]

For a given value of "arrive" - we would *know* of their existence earlier but Scandinavia is waaay too far north to cultivate any of those

Scandinavia is a net food exporter and have been a net food exporter since the first trade in North European grains and cereal began. While maize doesn’t do well in Scandinavia it’s able to grow there and before the Little Ice Age it would have been able to grow here rather well (as there were vineyards in Denmark at the time). Potatos thrive in Scandinavia even the Icelander the country with the most marginal agriculture in Scandinavia is able to feed itself with homegrown potato. In fact if we look at modern time Denmark delivered 1/3 of the meat and dairy of Greater German Reich and something like 1/6 of the vegetable matter, and that was with a non-mechanized agricultural sector and before the Green Revolution and while the Danish population still got more than enough calories themselves.

 

[Gloss]

My suspicion is that settlement will be relatively concentrated at first and slowly spread along the Gulf and River of Saint Lawrence with some assimilation and creolization of native groups along the way (a situation which was seen OTL with the Acadians in the modern Maritimes). I've mellowed some on creolization compared to previous threads, but I do still think a great deal of cultural mixing will occur.

You talked before about a linguistic creole but I think this idea is really unfeasible, we can always compare this to expansion of linguistic families in Afro-Eurasia, how often did things such as creoles or mixed languages form? I'd say fairly rarely even when the conditions were far more favourable.

For example Old English has very few Celtic loanwords despite majority of the English ancestry being pre-Germanic, similarly goes for the supposed pre-IE substratum in IE languages in most of Europe(even Germanic).

It seems to me that where the Norse become locally socially dominant and are above elite levels of demographic presence(>10%) then something akin to complete linguistic assimilation would happen over the course of a couple centuries of rule with influence being limited to new terms relating to fauna, flora, geography and specific local technology and ideas.
What else could they end up loaning and why? Commonly used words won't be replaced, especially because the Norse re a linguistically unified entity while the native loaners aren't and thus interaction between different Norse communities would be done primarily in Norse, thus reinforcing the usage of their common heritage words instead of replacement(this is also likely why some early Germanic words in Romance languages that are common but not basic like some colors and warfare-related terms are ubiquitous to all of them, either most of them start using it or none given the interconnectedness in the late Roman empire) and while it's possible some native words would replace some common(but not basic) Norse words it seems to me it would be more because of the simple chaos that exists in language change rather than due to other mechanisms, like substratum influence(which in any case can easily be minor), prestige language and so on.

It really shouldn't be unlike what happened to the languages brought by early modern Europeans and spoken in the mixed communities, what happened in slave plantations was exceptional as is what happened in Paraguay even.
A Paraguay case in North America could resemble what happened with the Basque during the Indo-European expansion but at the this involved peripheries with some sort of geographical barrier or peculiar local institution which hardly can apply to most of North America, or at least it wouldn't be the natural consequence, maybe it can happen in the middle-lower Appalachians a bit outside the more accessible river basins, Great Lakes and coast?